GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
(RAILWAY BOARD)

No. (E)55 CR 3/3 dated 09/08/55

Subject :- Confidential Reports - Preparation and Maintenance of.

It has been observed that adequate attention is not being paid in the matter of writing, maintenance, and etc., of annual confidential reports on the non-Gazetted Railway staff. The question has been reviewed and the Board have decided that the following general principles be laid down for the guidance of all concerned.

i. Importance of Annual Confidential Reports - The Board have accepted the principles that promotion to "Selection posts" should be based primarily on merit and to "Non-Selection posts" on the basis of Seniority-Cum-suitability and the assessment of relative merit turns to a great extent upon a comparison of confidential reports. To safeguard the interest of the Government no less than of the individual concerned, it is necessary to ensure that a confidential record of every employee is regularly and consciously maintained.

ii. Responsibility for the maintenance of Confidential Reports - The Head of every department/ office should regard it as a personal and special responsibility to ensure that annual confidential reports are properly maintained in respect of the persons working under his direct or ultimate control. It is the duty of officers at each level to keep a proper watch over the work and conduct of those below and to provide training and guidance wherever necessary. The annual confidential reports should be based upon the recorded results of such watchfulness and periodical inspections.

iii. Objectivity of Confidential Reports - In order to minimise the operation of the subjective human element and of conscious or unconscious bias, the confidential report on every employee recorded by his immediate superior should be submitted by the reporting officer to his own immediate superior. The latter should as a rule have sufficient knowledge of the work and qualities of the employees reported on, to be able to judge whether the reporting officer's report is fair and correct assessment. If he accepts it as such its objectivity is less open to doubt. If the superior officer does not fully agree with the reporting officer, he should indicate the nature and extent of such difference.

iv. Communication of adverse remarks - On the question whether a averse entries in confidential reports should be communicated to the employee, one view is that the 'unpleasantness' likely to be caused by the communication of adverse entries would tend to discourage the reporting officers from expressing their opinion freely and frankly; the opposite view is that failure to communicate adverse entries may enable unscrupulous reporting officers seriously to injure the prospects of an employee whom they dislike and that it is unfair to the employee to deny his promotion on account of defects of which he may well be unaware, and which he could have removed had he been informed of them.

Quite apart from the point of view of the employee himself, it is evidently in the interest of the State that every employee should know what his defects are and how he can remove them. Different solutions have been tried at different times to resolve this conflict. As a result of experience it is considered that the best results will only be achieved if every reporting officer is made conscious of the fact that it is his duty not only to make an objective assessment of his subordinate's work and qualities, but also to see that he gives to his subordinates at all times the necessary advice, guidance and assistance to correct their faults and deficiencies. If this part of the reporting Officers duty has been properly performed, there should be no difficulty about recording adverse entries, because they would only refer to defects which persisted despite the reporting officer's efforts to have them corrected. Accordingly in mentioning only faults or defects in the report the reporting officer should also give an indication of what efforts he had made by way of guidance, admonition etc., to get the defects removed and with what results. Every such entry after it is confirmed by the superior officer should normally be communicated to the officer concerned either verbally or in writing considering the nature of the remarks and the personality and the record of the officer and the fact of such communication recorded in the report itself. It should, however, be open to the superior officer to whom the remarks of the reporting officer are put up for acceptance to decide that the report need not be so communicated. Where the superior officer so desires, a specific order to this effect should be recorded by him.

v. Standardised form for writing Confidential Reports - The question of standardising the form for writing confidential report is receiving the Board's attention and their orders will be communicated in due course.

---

No. 21011/1/2006-Estt.(A)

Dated: March 28, 2006

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Communication of adverse entries/remarks recorded in the ACR.

The undersigned is directed to state t h at in acc o rda n ce with the existing instr u ction s o f thi s Depar t m ent, adverse entries/re m arks recor d ed i n the ACR of the official have to be communica t ed to hi m for further i m prov em ent in his perfor m ance and the official concerne d h as also an o p tion t o m ake a representation against the adverse re m arks within the p re s cribed ti m e li m it. According to t h e exi s ting instru c tions, the overall grading given in the ACR should ho w ever, not be communicated even when the grading given is below the bench m ark prescri b ed for pro m otion to the next higher grade. The overall grading recorded in the ACR has also not to be changed in any way even after the expunction o f the adverse re m arks either fully or partially by the co m petent authority.

The Hon'ble Supre m e Court has d eclared in its judge m ent, dated 22.11.2005 in UOI and Anr. Vs. Major Bahadur Singh ( C ivil Appeal No. 4482 of 2003) that the judge m ent of the court, dated 31.1.1996 in U P Jal Niga m and Ors. Vs. Prabhat Chandra Jain and Ors. SLP (Civil) No.16988/95 has no universal application and the judge m ent its e l f shows that it was intended to b e m eant only for the employees of UP Jal Nigam.

All Mini s tries/de p art m ents are accor d ingl y requeste d to ensure that any challenge t o the exi s tin g instr u ctio ns o f this Depart m ent in r egard to th e communication of adverse re m arks in any court taking shelter in the Supre m e Court judge m ent in UP Jal Niga m or any other judge m ent based on UP Jal Niga m judge m ent is properly defended keeping in view the above declaration of the Supre m e Court in UOI vs. Major Bahadur Singh.

C .A.. Subramanian
DY. S E CRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA